Degrees or Professional Boards

The way to professionalism these days would appear to be via university qualifications. Has the university mutated from institutions that were devoted to pure research and academic theory to applied science that was previously the province of board exams and apprenticeships.

Law is one example of this. Board exams were the way to qualify for practice, usually accompanied by an apprenticeship or articles. Abraham Lincoln could not now become a lawyer mostly anywhere by the method he did. Engineering, architecture, and accounting are yet other professions that could be entered by way of apprenticeships and professional examinations. In Australia, nursing qualifications could be earned by way of hospital training and board exams until relatively recently. I think in the UK that still can occur, although I may be mistaken. Again in the UK, Legal Executives, a new form of legal professional, still has board examinations. Medical professionals in Australia now require a degree just to enter medicine with one university being the exception (James Cook University). This has only been a recent requirement.

The university has expanded its base of operations considerably and increased the costs of professional entry and, perhaps, the overall cost of services to the public. Professional Boards were heavily into distance education which, in some less enlightened university circles, is an inferior and unworthy method of education. Has there been an accompanying increase in the quality of the professional that justifies the exclusionary effect and increase in costs? Where were the failures in the previous system?

 

My nephew (in the UK) earned his MB (first degree) which, after his internship, allowed him to become a doctor. He studied for and passed the exams to become a Fellow of The Royal College of Radiologists. He is now a consultant and goes by the term "Mr." and not "Dr." In the UK membership of a professional body often is equal to, or superior to, a university degree.

 

The university system should be a better way of producing high level professionals than apprenticeship. As I can attest to as an accountant, and as I have heard firsthand from attorneys and engineers, practice bears little resemblance to what is learned in school. This is true for a reason. The curriculum is designed to provide a breadth of experience and knowledge that goes beyond the ability to perform the actual job at hand, which is increasingly specialized and small in scope. The purpose of elite law schools is not to teach the black letter law, but to teach students how to think like a lawyer. These elements would either be very difficult or at minimum inefficient to teach during the on the job training of an apprenticeship.

However, as cookderosa pointed out, we have a credential inflation problem. A MBA from Strayer University so barely resembles a MBA from Harvard it is questionable they even share the same name. The latter continues to provide benefits which could not be gained in an apprenticeship or through self study, the former does not. It's not an either or situation. I believe there is a very important place for professional degrees in law, medicine, accounting, and engineering, but at the same time there are numerous jobs which require degrees but would be better served by hands on experience alone.

 

Degrees are now increasingly prescribed as required at a low organizational level where the degree really has a reduced value. The diploma does have more value at the senior levels where decisionmaking requires a breadth and depth of thought. A good quality degree should provide that ability, but there are very limited jobs at that level.

This requirement works for university growth, but does little for the individual who may increase the debt level to get the degree. It may cause a false expectation and provide little increase in job skill at practitioner level. In Australia, Tafe Colleges (equivalent of community colleges) are now offering vocational graduate diplomas to degree holders so they can function at the entry level of the organisation. The degree has not been found to be terribly effective at that level. The question must be asked why the degree is required at that level for entry?

Perhaps less, but better quality degrees and more apprenticeships or other traineeships. Universities should invest in quality, but fewer offerings.